Help me pick out a pair of skis! [moving to Kelowna, off snow for a while]

I'm moving back to Kelowna in December (currently in Edmonton) so I want to get back into skiing. I'm an intermediate skier, I used to go a lot when I was in high school and was quite good. During university I was too broke to ski so I got out of it. I've probably skied once or twice a year for the last 10 years. I'm 28 now. I can still ski decently but it will take me some time to get good again.

I'll be skiing at two resorts. Big White with my wife and Revelstoke with my buddies. My wife is decent enough but she's not aggressive just likes going down groomed runs and nothing too steep. My buddies shred pretty hard.

I also want to do some back country skiing. I have all my avalanche safety and crevasse rescue training because I used to work at a gold mine in the mountains.

I want a set of skis primarily for Revelstoke and back-country skiing but also something that will be okay for the odd easy day with my wife. I also want something that is suitable for an intermediate skier; ie, something that won't be too difficult to handle in the trees.

I guess I should add that I'm 5'9 tall and 165 lbs.

At this point, I'm leaning towards the Rossignol Soul7 (106 underfoot), in 172 cm length with Marker F10 bindings. Last time I skied, I rented a pair of Experience 88s and they were great for ripping down groomers and crud snow but I don't think they would be wide enough for Revelstoke or back-country stuff. I've also looked at the Rossignol Super7s but I think they might be too hard to handle at this point.

I haven't been up to Big White or Revelstoke to ski yet but its on the list. I'm a big fan of Red Mountain because its a close drive for me in N Washington.

You can't go wrong with the Soul7's I demoed a pair and thought they were a great all around ski which sounds like what you're leaning towards. Check out the Liberty Orgins. My primary skis are their double helix and I absolutely love them. The Bizzard Gunsmokes are getting great reviews this year too. I'm definitely going to try them out.

172 is too short especially with a ski with any type of rocker/early rise. The next size up would be much better. Another ski to consider similar to the Soul but a little wider is the Line Sick Day 110 in 179. Light, quick, forgiving, versatile and great reviews.

Very nice for sidecountry and maybe a little more durable than the Rossi tips and tails.

Wow does everyone think that Kelowna get tons of snow all the time? Revi does OK but for one pair of skis if your going to be at Big White, SilverStar and Apex you should look for something in he 85 mm range that you can ski on the groomers, crud and occasional powder day. Skis like the Hed Rev 85, Volkl RTM 84 come to mind as the best single skis for this resorts.

Wow does everyone think that Kelowna get tons of snow all the time? Revi does OK but for one pair of skis if yor.ur going to be at Big White, SilverStar and Apex you should look for something in he 85 mm range that you can ski on the groomers, crud and occasional powder day. Skis like the Hed Rev 85, Volkl RTM 84 come to mind as the best single skis for this resorts.

The OPs primary focus is on backcountry where he will have the opportunity to ski lots of powder.

Backcountry aside, a well designed, modern 100+ ski will perform as well as an 85 on soft snow while an 85 will never be as effective as a 100+ off piste. At my home hills (Fernie and Castle) you very seldom see skis <100 on intermediate or more advanced slopes, even on the steeper groomers. The people on narrower skis are usually tourists from the East especially if they are on something as narrow as an 85. That would be considered almost a groomer carver ski. In spite of being labelled 'all mountain', the narrower skis just aren't as versatile when it comes to western resorts with primarily soft snow.

Castle Dave, With all due respect, the OP didn't say anything about back country skiing. I have spent more than 50 days in Fernie over the last few years and have many friends there. Fernie and Castle (which i haven't skied and need to) so comments on Fernie only, it is a bit of a Microcosm. the average ski width down there is more than 100mm, yet everywhere else on the "powder highway" is about 95-100 mm. Fernie gets huge dumps where 100 mm + skis are needed, even though many of the locals have an 80 something ski to ski on in non dump days and get more days on them than there fatties.

Big White on the other hand, where I have also spent lots of time, probably more than Fernie doesn't get the huge dumps that Fernie can and has a lot more days of 20-40 cm "dumps" and a lot dryer snow. The majority of the lift lines are filled with 80mm+ skis on a given day, way so more than a given day's lift line in Fernie. B.C.skiing is not as accessible in Big White as is in Fernie.

In summary if the OP was headed to Fernie or Revi then I would agree more with you.

I also want to do some back country skiing. I have all my avalanche safety and crevasse rescue training because I used to work at a gold mine in the mountains.

I want a set of skis primarily for Revelstoke and back-country skiing but also something that will be okay for the odd easy day with my wife. I also want something that is suitable for an intermediate skier; ie, something that won't be too difficult to handle in the trees.

This is the OP. As you can see 'primarily for Revelstoke and back-country skiing'

No problem. I have 130+ days on my Cochises and love them partly because of their flattish, stiff tails. However they are chargers for sure and probably not the best for messing around with the wife and kids nor tight trees. The Sick Day 110 is the same design with almost identical early rise and very subtle tail rocker, not soft but softer all over, a < 20m radius and WAY lighter with no metal. Line says they have camber (unlike the '14 and older Cochise which are flat)) but IMO that's just marketing hype. I have the Sick Day 125s and the weight of the bindings alone flattens the ski.